One man.....6 votes?!?!

kinev

Golden Member
Mar 28, 2005
1,647
30
91
Well, apparently Hispanics weren't voting enough, so Federal Judge Stephen Robinson decided to give everybody 6 votes. His reasoning seems to be that because Hispanics weren't voting and no Hispanic had ever been elected as a village trustee (despite Hispanics making up nearly half of the population); that constituted a violation of the Voting Rights Act and the way to fix it is to give everyone 6 votes. Really. No, I'm not making this up.

Even taking the obvious political implications out, how can this be Constitutional? How long before "Judge" Robinson decides that only Hispanics should get 6 votes and Caucasians, African-Americans, and Asians only get one?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100615/ap_on_el_st_lo/us_voting_rights_election

Residents get 6 votes each in suburban NY election

By JIM FITZGERALD, Associated Press Writer Jim Fitzgerald, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jun 15, 4:15 am ET

PORT CHESTER, N.Y. – Arthur Furano voted early — five days before Election Day. And he voted often, flipping the lever six times for his favorite candidate.

Furano cast multiple votes on the instructions of a federal judge and the U.S. Department of Justice as part of a new election system crafted to help boost Hispanic representation.

Voters in Port Chester, 25 miles northeast of New York City, are electing village trustees for the first time since the federal government alleged in 2006 that the existing election system was unfair.

Although the village of about 30,000 residents is nearly half Hispanic, no Latino had ever been elected to any of the six trustee seats, which until now were chosen in a conventional at-large election. Most voters were white, and white candidates always won.

Federal Judge Stephen Robinson said that violated the Voting Rights Act, and he approved a remedy suggested by village officials: a system called cumulative voting, in which residents get six votes each to apportion as they wish among the candidates. He rejected a government proposal to break the village into six districts, including one that took in heavily Hispanic areas.

Furano and his wife, Gloria Furano, voted Thursday.

"That was very strange," Arthur Furano, 80, said after voting. "I'm not sure I liked it. All my life, I've heard, 'one man, one vote.'"

It's the first time any municipality in New York has used cumulative voting, said Amy Ngai, a director at FairVote, a nonprofit election research and reform group that has been hired to consult. The system is used to elect the school board in Amarillo, Texas, the county commission in Chilton County, Ala., and the City Council in Peoria, Ill.

The judge also ordered Port Chester to implement in-person early voting, allowing residents to show up on any of five days to cast ballots. That, too, is a first in New York, Ngai said.

Village clerk Joan Mancuso said Monday that 604 residents voted early.

Gloria Furano gave one vote each to six candidates. Aaron Conetta gave two votes each to three candidates.

Frances Nurena talked to the inspectors about the new system, grabbed some educational material and went home to study. After all, it was only Thursday. She could vote on Friday, Saturday or Tuesday.

"I understand the voting," she said. "But since I have time, I'm going to learn more about the candidates."

FairVote said cumulative voting allows a political minority to gain representation if it organizes and focuses its voting strength on specific candidates. Two of the 13 Port Chester trustee candidates — one Democrat and one Republican — are Hispanic. A third Hispanic is running a write-in campaign after being taken off the ballot on a technicality.

Results were expected late Tuesday night. The Department of Justice said Monday that federal observers would be at all polling places Tuesday.

Campaigning was generally low-key, and the election itself was less of an issue than housing density and taxes.

Hispanic candidates Fabiola Montoya and Luis Marino emphasized their volunteer work and said they would represent all residents if elected.

Gregg Gregory gave all his votes to one candidate, then said, "I think this is terrific. It's good for Port Chester. It opens it up to a lot more people, not just Hispanics but independents, too."

Vote coordinator Martha Lopez said that if turnout is higher than in recent years, when it hovered around 25 percent, the election would be a success — regardless of whether a Hispanic was elected.

"I think we'll make it," she said. "I'm happy to report the people seem very interested."

But Randolph McLaughlin, who represented a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said the goal was not merely to encourage more Hispanics to vote but "to create a system whereby the Hispanic community would be able to nominate and elect a candidate of their choice."

That could be a non-Hispanic, he acknowledged, and until exit polling is done, "it won't be known for sure whether the winners were Hispanic-preferred."

The village held 12 forums — six each in English and Spanish — to let voters know about the new system and to practice voting. The bilingual ballot lists each candidate across the top row — some of them twice if they have two party lines — and then the same candidates are listed five more times. In all, there are 114 levers; voters can flip any six.

Besides the forums, bright yellow T-shirts, tote bags and lawn signs declared "Your voice, your vote, your village," part of the educational materials also mandated in the government agreement. Announcements were made on cable TV in each language.

All such materials — the ballot, the brochures, the TV spots, the reminders sent home in schoolkids' backpacks — had to be approved in advance, in English and Spanish versions, by the Department of Justice.

Conetta said the voter education effort was so thorough he found voting easier than usual.

"It was very different but actually quite simple," he said. "No problem."
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,839
2,625
136
Totally misleading title and false outrage shown by the OP. He apparently doesn't understand the voting system there. EVERYONE in the district gets six votes for the trustee counsel, not just Hispanics, and everyone has the right to distribute their six votes as they see fit. No individual has any more voting power than anyone else. This is certainly not a violation of the one man, one vote concept.
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
I don't see the problem here... So now everyone gets 6 votes, if they go all in nothing will change at all, if they do like more than one candidate (as it seems many do given the top six vote getters seem to get in) then this might be a nice change.

Allowing an individual to weigh their choice is perfectly valid. I'm far more partial to instant runoff ranked ballots as a way of changing how we vote here.. but more power to em if they think it will help, which it very well may in in the specific system they have.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
WTF? I don't care if everyone had the 6 votes or wtf ever. 5 days of F'n voting? What a joke. Vote on ELECTION DAY. IF you know you won't be able to vote that day - vote absentee. It's really not that hard. I swear you morons that want to keep F'n with the voting system to target certain groups are ruining the integrity of the process. There is exactly ZERO reason a person needs 5 F'n days to vote. Zero reason someone shouldn't have to show ID to prove who they are when voting. Zero reason that someone needs to register to vote the day of the election - if you want to vote - you had plenty of time before the damn election to register. Sheesh
/rant
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
5 days to vote? each person gets to cast 6 votes? sorry that is just plain stupid.

1 day to vote.
1 man 1 vote.

the town is mostly Hispanic, but no Hispanic has been elected... well apparently the Hispanics who have run didn't appeal to the voters. and cudos to them for not voting the race card.
 
Last edited:

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
I don't mind the change from 1 vote to 6 votes, it will allow people a greater degree of choice. 5 days to vote seems a bit pointless though.

My problem though is that I don't see how its legally relevant that no hispanic candidate has ever won. They lost in fair elections, so what ? If the large hispanic population wanted them elected then there's a rather simple solution: Go vote.
 

Danube

Banned
Dec 10, 2009
613
0
0
"Whiteness" is being criminalized in Westchester county (where Port Chester is). The feds also decided a wealthy community there that doesn't have enough flava has to build low income housing. All the diversity crap is a racist scam.
 

Daedalus685

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2009
1,386
1
0
5 days to vote? each person gets to cast 6 votes? sorry that is just plain stupid.

1 day to vote.
1 man 1 vote.

First past the post 1:1 is a bit silly in some situations. Particularly where there are more than only a couple of folk running.

We shouldn't be so scared of different methods. While I don't think this will do much there is no reason one should not be able to weigh there preference in a situation where the top six are going to win... now one can either go all in on their favourite or split it up across a team they want to see in council.

This shouldn't be that big of a deal.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,407
8,595
126
the rage about being able to vote early in person is laughable, what the hell does that hurt?
 

Turin39789

Lifer
Nov 21, 2000
12,218
8
81
the rage about being able to vote early in person is laughable, what the hell does that hurt?

I really don't know.

There are a ridiculous number of ways to organize elections. If you want to read into the mathematics involved start with Borda/Condorcet and imho end with Saari. Still surprised that they would try this method out after so many years of our "typical" model, voting models often determine outcomes.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,612
3,834
126
WTF? I don't care if everyone had the 6 votes or wtf ever. 5 days of F'n voting? What a joke. Vote on ELECTION DAY. IF you know you won't be able to vote that day - vote absentee. It's really not that hard. I swear you morons that want to keep F'n with the voting system to target certain groups are ruining the integrity of the process. There is exactly ZERO reason a person needs 5 F'n days to vote. Zero reason someone shouldn't have to show ID to prove who they are when voting. Zero reason that someone needs to register to vote the day of the election - if you want to vote - you had plenty of time before the damn election to register. Sheesh
/rant

If you can't find a way to vote absentee or on the day in question you obviously do not care enough about the outcome to make it a priority. Stop being a lazy prick and do your civic duty or stop bitching when the government does something you don't like
 

dammitgibs

Senior member
Jan 31, 2009
477
0
0
Ok the title and article is certainly misleading but still this is one weird and fucked up system, and the fact that the goal and reasoning was to get someone of a certain ethnicity elected, fuck you racist assholes.
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
Why is the federal government involved with this and where is that power derived from the federal constitution?
 

kinev

Golden Member
Mar 28, 2005
1,647
30
91
Totally misleading title and false outrage shown by the OP. He apparently doesn't understand the voting system there. EVERYONE in the district gets six votes for the trustee counsel, not just Hispanics, and everyone has the right to distribute their six votes as they see fit. No individual has any more voting power than anyone else. This is certainly not a violation of the one man, one vote concept.

Reading comprehension fail. I never claimed everyone doesn't get six votes. I did suggest that giving certain people more votes could be a next step from this "decision".

My main problem with this is that the judge decided specifically and on record to make this decision in order to "remedy" the fact that a Hispanic hadn't been elected yet. Does that seem fair? Yes, in the end, everyone gets 6 votes and therefore everyone's votes are equal.

But, are you okay with a Federal Judge deciding that not having any Hispanics elected to the trustee council is bad and changing election law to "remedy" that? I'm not. As for not seeing how this is "not a violation of the one man, one vote concept" I suppose mathematics isn't your strong suit.

What if a judge decided that there weren't enough white council members in Harlem and set up a system that was designed to "remedy" that by getting white people elected? Would that be okay?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Just another case of tyranny in black robes. This does demonstrate the difference between conservative and progressive views of the judiciary though. Conservatives believe judges should impartially judge according to the law - justice is blind, and if you have a problem change the law. Progressives believe judges should bring fairness to society, that a judge should determine the "fair" result and rule that way regardless of the law. Justice is not blind (or even color blind) but is presumably fair. Here we have a judge who decided what the election results should be and unilaterally established his own law to achieve those results. The law be damned, it's rule by fiat.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
I don't see how this is going to help. if people are not voting then it don't matter if you give them 100.

the people that vote (now x6) are still going to out vote the other. Or am i missing something?
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
3
0
WTF? I don't care if everyone had the 6 votes or wtf ever. 5 days of F'n voting? What a joke. Vote on ELECTION DAY. IF you know you won't be able to vote that day - vote absentee. It's really not that hard. I swear you morons that want to keep F'n with the voting system to target certain groups are ruining the integrity of the process. There is exactly ZERO reason a person needs 5 F'n days to vote. Zero reason someone shouldn't have to show ID to prove who they are when voting. Zero reason that someone needs to register to vote the day of the election - if you want to vote - you had plenty of time before the damn election to register. Sheesh
/rant

True.. Voting should be as militaristic as absolutely possible..

I hope you aren't one of those who pass out that cup o rage image :rolleyes:
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
What the fuck does not having someone of a certain ethnicity serve in office have to do with changing the way people vote? I don't fucking get it. It's like he intentionally made this about race. If that isn't racist I don't know what is.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Totally misleading title and false outrage shown by the OP. He apparently doesn't understand the voting system there. EVERYONE in the district gets six votes for the trustee counsel, not just Hispanics, and everyone has the right to distribute their six votes as they see fit. No individual has any more voting power than anyone else. This is certainly not a violation of the one man, one vote concept.

Umm. You mis-state the Op's post.

I read it and re-read it; you should too.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
This seems pretty stupid to me. I don't understand how giving everyone 6 votes will result in any advantage to a minority candidate, or how it will increase voter turn-out.

I'm curious about the electorial results.

Fern
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
This seems pretty stupid to me. I don't understand how giving everyone 6 votes will result in any advantage to a minority candidate, or how it will increase voter turn-out.

I'm curious about the electorial results.

Fern

that's what confuses me. giving everyone 6 votes is nto going to help if the minority is not coming out to vote. they are still going to lose (now by a larger number)
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
the rage about being able to vote early in person is laughable, what the hell does that hurt?

That's what I was wondering. These rightwingnuts will come up with ANYTHING to complain about. I guess if making it easier to vote could somehow hurt them, then it's something to be outraged about?
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
If you can't find a way to vote absentee or on the day in question you obviously do not care enough about the outcome to make it a priority. Stop being a lazy prick and do your civic duty or stop bitching when the government does something you don't like

So it's 5 days instead of 1... How is that in any way worse? Because it's not making it harder for some people who can't get to the polls on the 1 day? Because it doesn't benefit retired people?

This is the most stupid outrage I've ever seen from the wingnuts on this forum.... Never in my life did I think I'd see people complaining about early voting. It's just mind boggling.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
So it's 5 days instead of 1... How is that in any way worse? Because it's not making it harder for some people who can't get to the polls on the 1 day? Because it doesn't benefit retired people?

This is the most stupid outrage I've ever seen from the wingnuts on this forum.... Never in my life did I think I'd see people complaining about early voting. It's just mind boggling.

Anyone who isn't a moron knows and understands that if you can't make it or don't think you can make it to the polls on ELECTION DAY - you can vote absentee.
What's next? Have ACORN(or the like) go around to people's houses to collect votes?

It's not that hard people - if you care about voting - there is ample opportunity for you to do so.